MIR-SAID SULTAN-GALIYEV* was a Volga Tatar who
was born in a village in Bashkiria in 1880. He studied first at the village
mekteb (Muslim primary school), and then at the teacher's training college
of Kazan. He returned to his native village as a teacher, and then went
to Ufa as librarian. From 1911 he contributed articles to many Russian
and Tatar periodicals.

He joined the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks)
in November 1917. The Central Commissariat for Muslim Affairs (Muskom)
was created by government decree in January 1918, and later that year Sultan-Galiyev
became its Chairman.
The Central Muslim Military Collegium (CMMC)
was formed in April 1918 to direct Muslim troops fighting on the
Red side, and Sultan-Galiyev became its Chairman in December 1918. In 1920
he was promoted to membership of the three-man, Inner Collegium of the
Commissariat of Nationalities (Narkomnats), under Stalin as Commissar,
and was made co-editor of the Commissariat's official 'Zhizn Natsionalnostei'
(The Life of the Nationalities).

By 1920 Sultan-Galiyev:

"had become the most important Muslim in the entire Soviet hierarchy
and had acquired a unique position from which to influence the Eastern
policies of the Communist regime". (Richard Pipes: 'The Formation of the
Soviet Union: Communism and Nationalism: 1917,1923'; Cambridge (USA); 1954;
p. 169).

Marxism-Leninism maintains that, in a colonial-type
country, the revolutionary process must go through two successive stages
-- that of national-democratic revolution and that of socialist revolution.
Marxist-Leninists must support the national-democratic revolution and strive
to win leadership of that revolution for the working class and its party,
so as to transform it, with the minimum possible interruption, into a socialist
revolution that will construct a socialist society.

Sultan-Galiyevism, on the other hand, put forward
the view:

1) 'that Muslim peoples are 'proletarian peoples', so that national
movements among them are movements of socialist revolution:

"The material premises for a social transformation of humanity can be
created only through the establishment of the dictatorship of the colonies
and semi-colonies over the metropolises". (Mir Said Sultan-Galiev, in:
Richard Pipes: op. cit..; p. 261).

2) That in areas inhabited by Muslims, the Communist
Party must "integrate with Islam":

"The Muslim 'national communists' felt that . . . they had to reconcile
Marxist teaching with that of Islam. They were therefore eager to preserve
Islamic culture and the Muslim way of life. . . .
Islam's strong moral, social and political influence should be retained".
(Alexandre Bennigsen & Marie Broxup: 'The Islamic Threat to the
Soviet State'; London; 1983; p. 82-83).

3) The integration of Marxism with Islam should be brouhgt about by
a special party:

"His (Sultan-Galiyev's -- Ed.) plan . . . was to begin with the creation
of a Muslim state on the Middle Volga....... To this state were to
be joined, first the Turkic Muslims of Russia and later all the other Russian
Muslims".
(Geoffrey Wheeler: 'The Modern History of Soviet Central Asia' London
1964; p. 124).

". . . in June 1918, at the First Conference of Muslim Communists,
held in Kazan, the Party of Muslim Socialist-Communists was transformed
into the 'Russian Party of Muslim Communists (Bolsheviks)'. . . . It was
to be open to Muslims only, was to have equal status with the RCB(b), and
was to enjoy organisational independence to the extent of having its own
Central Committee".
(Azade-Ayse Rorlich: ibid.; p. 145).

The Marxist-Leninists' Counter-moves for a Unified
Party (1918-20)

This movement by the 'Sultan-galiyevists' for a separate
Muslim Communist Party, came about during the Civil War. In this climate,
it was tolerated since a counter-struggle was a distraction:

"Although not applauded by the RCP(b), was tolerated for purely tactical
purposes under the stress of the Civil War".
(Azade-Ayse Rorlich: ibid.; p. 145).

But as soon as the danger from the Civil War had passed,
the Marxist-Leninists connter-moved:

"Representing
the Central Committee of the RCP(b), rejected these demands in the name
of centralism and administrative efficiency".(Alexandre
Bennigsen & Chantal Quelquejay: ibid.; p. 128).

Stalin used the congress:

"To halt
the centrifugal forces that had set the course for the emergence of a parallel
and rival party organisation of the Russian Muslims. . . .
The Russian Party of Muslim Communists underwent a substantial metamorphosis,
re-emerging in the process as the 'Central Bureau' of Muslim Organisations
of the RCP(b), whose central committeebecame
the . . . Muskom (Central Commissariat for Muslim Affairs Ed.),
presided over by Sultan Galiyev".(Azade-Ayse
Rorlich: op. cit.; p. 145).

Thus, the Central Bureau of Muslim Organisations:

"Found
itself closely attached to the Russian Communist Party, all the more so
since the chairman of the new Central Bureau of Muslim Organis.ations of
the RCP(b) elected at the conclusion of the congress was Stalin, a delegate
of the Central Committee of the RCP(b)". (Alexandre Bennigsen & Chantal
Quelquejay: op. cit.; p. 128).

In March 1919, the 8th Congress of the RCP(b) established

"A unified
and centralised Communist Party (thoughout Soviet Russia-Ed).......
All decisions of the RCP(b) and of its guiding organs are binding on Party
organs, regardless of their national:composition".(Russian
Communist Party (bolsheviks): Resolution of 8th Congress of the RCP(b)
(March 1919), in: Alexandre A. Bennigsen & S. EndersWimbush: op. cit.; p. 62).

Immediately after the congress:

"The Central
Bureau of Muslim Organisations was replaced by the 'Central
Bureau of Comunist Organisations of the Peoples of the East'".(Alexandre
Bennigsen & Chantal Quelquejay: op. cit.; p, 131)

In other
words it:

"was stripped
of its socio-cultural meaning and was insteadendowed
with a geographic attribute".(Azade-Ayse
Rorlich: op. cit p.
145).

At the 2nd Congress of Communist Organisations of the Peoples of the
East, held in Moscow in November/December 1919:

"Left
no doubt that the RCP(b) and its chief expert on nationality problems,
Stalin, had reversed the tide of organisational independence that the Tatar
'national communists' had set in motion in 1918".(Azade-Ayse
Rorlich: op. cit.; p. 145-46).

However in October 1919 the Tatar 'national communists':

"Made
a bid for autonomy for their party organisation at thelocal
level".(Azade-Ayse
Rorlich: ibid.; p. 146).

The
Proposal for a Tatar-Bashkir Republic (1919-20)

Although a Bashkir Automonous Soviet Socialist Republic had been
established in March 1919, in November 1919, at the Preparatory Conference
for the 2nd Congress of Communist Organisations of the Peoples of the East:

"Sultan-
Galiyev demanded . . . the speedy creation of the Tataro-Bashkir state.
Lenin refused to consider this demand, and the matter was referred to the
Central Committee of the RCP(b). ....
Some days later, Sultan-Galiyev renewed his attempt at the 2nd Congress
of Communist Organisations of the Peoples of the East. ....
Again the Russian leaders rejected these demands".(Alexandre
Bennigsen & Chantal Quelquejay: op. cit.; p.141).

"Renewed
their suppport for the formation of a Tatar-Bashkir republic".(Azade-Ayse
Rorlich: ibid.; p. 137).

As proposed by Sultan-Galiyev.
But in view of the influence of Sultan-Galiyevism in the region:

"The Soviet
government chose to sponsor the formation of smaller republics".Azade-Ayse
Rorlich: ibid.; p. 137-38).

So in December 1919:

" . .
the Politburo of the Central Committee of the RussianCommunist
(Bolshevik) Party, which was presided over by Lenin, decided to halt all
efforts to create a Tatar-Bashkir republic".(Az:ade-Ayse
Rorlich: ibid.; p. 137).

Nevertheless,in March
1920, a delegation of three, including Sultan-Galiyev:

". . .
visited Lenin to try to convince him of the necessity of enlarging the
frontiers of the future Tatar republic so as to include the Bashkirs and
other Muslims. Yet again Lenin rejected this demand and accused the Tatars
of demonstrating 'imperialist chauvinism', of seeking to impose their domination
over the more backward Bashkirs".(Alexandre
Bennigsen & Chantal Quelquejay: op. cit.; p. 142-43).

"The Central
Committee of the RCP(b) sought to weaken the Tatar and their independent
stand by removing their most prominentCommunists
'leader from Kazan".(Azade-Ayse
Rorlich: op. cit.; p. 146).

Sultan-Galiyev's
Mission to the Crimea (1921)

In the spring of 1921, Sultan-Galiyev was sent to the Crimea, to report
on conditions there. His report, published in May 1921, proposed that a
Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic be created. This recommendation
was accepted by the Soviet authorities who:

"Despite
objections from local Communists and the acceptance of a resolution by
the Crimean Regional Communist Party Congress against the creation of a
republic. . . . carried out Sultan-Galiyev's recommendation and established
in November 1921 the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Soviet Republic".(Richard Pipes: op Cit.; p.190.)

The territory of the Crimean ASSR, was occupied by German forces between
1941 and 1944:

"General
Manstein* was relatively successful in his attempts togain
active support from the Tatars. According to both German and Tatarevidence, the Germans persuaded
between 15,000 and 20,000 Tatars to formself-defence
battalions that were partially armed by the Germans and sentinto the mountains to hunt down
partisan units. . . .
Most accounts claim that the Crimean Tatars were unduly privileged during
the German regime. .....
There is no question that large numbers of Tatar villagers, as well as
the Tatar self-defence battalions, fought hard against the Sovietpartisans. The traitors knew well
the local inhabitants and turnedover
all suspicious characters (often the patriots) to the German police".(Alan;W.Fisher:
'The Crimean Tatars'; Stanford (USA): 1978; p. 155, 157,
158).

As a result of this mass treason, in May/June 1944, the Crimean Tatars
were deported from the Crimea to
distant parts of the Soviet Union. And:

"On June
30 1945, a year after the deportation, the Crimean ASSR
was abolished and transformed into the Crimean oblast (district
- Ed.) of the RSFSR".(Alan,W.
Fisher: ibid.; p. 167).

(A more
detailed description of the background to the mass resettlements 'Ls, to
be found in a paper entitled 'The Enforced Resettlements, read to the ;talin
Society in July 1993. See web-page: Resettlements).

The
First Arrest (1923)

Sultan-Galiyevwas:

"arrested
for the first time in May 1923 and excluded from the Communst Party for
'nationalist deviation'."(Alexandre
A. Bennigsen & S. Enders Wimbush: op. cit.; p. 208).

According to Trotsky, Sultan-Galiyev's arrest was initiated by Stalin,
with the approval of other leaders, including Kamenev and Zinoviev:

"'Do you
remember the arrest of Sultan-Galiyev in 1923?', Kamenev continued.'This
was the first arrest of a prominent Party member upon the initiative of
Stalin. Unfortunately Zinoviev and I gave our consent".(Leon,Trotsky:
'Stalin': New York; 1941; p. 417).

Sultan-Galiyev:

"Was never
formally tried. He was released from custody in June 1923
... 'in recognition of services rendered to the revolution"'.A. Bennigsen
& S. Enders Wimbush: op. cit.; p. 85).

Although at the 4th Conference on the National Republics and Regions held
in June 1923 (a few weeks after
his arrest), Sultan-Galiyev was accused of'treason'
and participation in 'objectively counter-revolutionary' activity,
at this time the full scale of his
subversive activity against the Soviet
state was not known. For example, it was not known that in 1920:

"Sultan-Galiyev,
Zeki Validov* and a group of prominent Muslim 'national
communists' . . . met in Moscow and founded the secret group
'Ittihad ve Tarakki' (Union and
Progress)....
'Ittihad ve Tarakki' pursued
a threefold goal:

to infiltate
'national communist' Turks into the 'Communist Party and the Soviet government
apparatus; . . .to inculcate
Islamic and pan-Turkic ideals;and to
establish contacts with counter-revolutionary
organisations abroad and in Soviet Russia,especially
with the Basmachi**".(Alexandre
A. Bennigsen & S. Enders Wimbush: op. cit.; p. 87).

The
4th Conference on the National Republics and Regions(1923)

On,9-12 June 1923, the 4th Conference of the Central Committee
of the Russian Communist Party with
Workers of the National Republics and Regions was held in Moscow:

A resolution was adopted on 'the Sultan-Galiyey' case', the principal points
of which were:

"1. Sultan-Galiyev,
appointed by the Party to a responsible postof
the Collegium of the People's Commisariat of Nationalities), profited from
his situation and the relations which arose from it . . .to set up . . . an illegal organisation
in order to oppose measures taken by the central organs of the Party. He
had recourse to conspiratorialmethods,
and used secret information in order to deliberately falsify the decisions
of the Party on national policy.2. Sultan-Galiyev
tried to utilise this anti-Party organisation to sap the confidence of
the formerly oppressed nationalities in the revoluionary
proletariat, and sought to prejudice
the union of these two forces, which is one of the essential elements for
the existence ofSoviet
power and for the liberation of the peoples of the East from
imperilaism.3. Sultan-Galiyev
strove to extend his organisation beyond the the Union of Soviet Republics,
trying to enter into relatiosn with his supporters in certain Eastern countries
(Persia, Turkey)to rally
them around a platform opposed to the policy of the Soviet
power.....4. The
anti-Party, objectively counter-revolutionary aims of Sultan-Galiyev and
the very logic of his anti-Party activity led him to treason, to alliance
with the counter-revolutionary forces openly struggling to overthrow the
Soviet regime. Thus, he has sought to linkup
through the medium of their chief, Zeki Validov, with the Basmachi** of
Turkestan and Bokhara, who are supported by international imperialism.5. The
conference considers, in consequence, that the criminal acts of towards
Party unity and the Soviet Republic, acts entirely admitted by him in his
confessions, place him outside the Communist Party".(Alexandre
Bennigsen & Chantal Lemercier-Quelquejay: 'Sultan-Galiev: Le pere de
la revolution tiers-mondiale' (Sultan-Galiyev: The Father ofThird-World Revolution); Paris;
1986; p. 215-16).

At the conference, Stalin defended his past support of Sultan-Galiyev:

"I have
been reproached...... with having defended Sultan-Galiyevexcessively. It is true that I defended
him as long as it was possible, and I
considered, and still consider, that it was my duty to do so. But I defended
him only up to a certain point. . . . When Sultan-Galiyev went that
point, I turned away from him. ...
There are so few intellectuals, so few thinking people, even so few literary
people generally in the Eastern republics and regions, that one count them
on one's fingers. How can one help cherishing them?"(Josef
V. Stalin: Speech on the Sultan-Galiyev Case. 4th Conference of the Central
Committee of the RCP(b) with Responsible Workers of the National Republics
and Regions (June 1923), in: 'Works', Volume 5; Moscow;.1953; p. 309, 310).

Stalin tells how, after he had criticised Sultan-Galiyev, the latter:

"Replied,
in great embarrassment, that he had always been aParty
man and was so still, and he gave his word of honour that he wouldcontinue to be a Party man in the
future".(Josef
V. Stalin: ibid.; p. 310).

Despite,this promise, Stalin records,

"A week
later he sent Adigamov a second secret letterinstructing
him to establish contact with the Basmachi** and with theirleader Validov, and to 'burn' the
letter. From that moment Sultan-Galiyev became for me a man beyond the
pale of the Party, of theSoviets".(Josef
V. Stalin: ibid.; p. 310).

When, following Sultan-Galiyev's arrest, some Tatar Communists demanded
his release on the grounds that the letters concernedin
the case were were "forgeries",
an investigation was held:

"What
did the investigation reveal? It revealed that all the docoments were genuine.
Their genuineness was admitted by Sultan-Galiyevhimself,
who, in fact, gave more information about his sins than is contained in
the documents, who fully confessed his guilt and, afterconfessing,
repented".(Josef,V.
Stalin: ibid.; p. 312).

Further
Conspiratorial Activity (1923-27)

Upon his release, Sultan-Galiyev:

"Again
became a journalist and worked until 1928 in various state publishing houses,
notably at 'Gosizdat' of Moscow".(Alexandre
Bennigsen & Chantal Lemercier-Quelquejay.: op. cit.; p. 219).

"Having
lost his positions in the Russian Communist Party for his
deviationist tendencies, Sultan-Galiyev
tried for a final time to create a structure which could embrace the proponents
of the Eastern and set it in motion. This was his 'Colonial International'.The Colonial International was to
be independent of the Comintern andall
European Communist Parties, including the Russian CommunistParty, if not opposed to them".(Alexandre
A. Bennigsen & S. Enders Wimbush: op, cit.; p. 58).

"It was
between 1923 and 1927 that Sultan-Galiyev, out of prison and living in
Georgia and Moscow, most actively worked to create a system of secret underground
organisations, centred in Moscow and Kazan, but withoffshoots
extending as far as Alma-Ata and Tashkent. . . Many Muslim
'national communist' leaders . .
. were connected to this organisation. ....
There can be little doubt that the latter did indeed conspire".(Alexandre
A. Bennigsen & S. Enders Wimbush: op. cit.; p. 87, 88).

"The majority
of the Tatar members of the Tatar Obkom (Regional Party Committee -- Ed.)
were arrested, tried for 'Sultan-Galiyevism' and"treason',
and executed".
At the same time, the Communist Party of the Tatar Republic of Crimea was
purged. Veli Ibrahimov*, the 1st Secretary of the Crimean Obkom,
was arrested, tried
and executed for counter-revolutionary activity".(Alexandre
A. Bennigsen & S. Enders Wimbush: ibid.; p. 91).

"The great
purge in the Muslim republics ..... began in 1928. Itstarted
in Crimea with the execution of Veli Ibrahimov, First Secretaryof the Tatar Communist Party".(Alexandre
Bennigsen & Marie Broxup: op. cit.; p. 85).

In February 1921 and again in June 1923, Stalin summed up the role ofbourgeois nationalism in the border
regions of the Soviet Union:

"Communists
from the local native population who experienced the harshperiod of national oppression, and
who have not yet fully freedthemselves
from the haunting memories of that period, often exaggerate the importance
of specific national features in their Party work, leavethe class
interests of the working people in the shade, or simply confuse the interests
of the working people of the nation concerned with the 'national'
interests of that nation; they are unable to separate the from the latter
and base their Party work on them. That, in its turn, leads to a deviation
from communism towards bourgeois-democraticnationalism,
which sometimes assumes the form of pan-Islamism, pan-Turkism (in the East)".(Josef
V. Stalin: Theses for the 10th Congress of the RCP(b) (February 1921),
in: 'Works', Volume 5; Moscow; 1953; p. 28.

"In relation
to our Communist organisations in the border regions and republics. . .
. nationalism is playing the same role . . . as Menshevism in the past
played in relation to the Bolshevik Party. Only under cover of nationalism
can various kinds of bourgeois, including Menshevik,influences
penetrate our organisations in the border regions".(Josef
V. Stalin: Speech on the 'Sultan-Galiyev Case', 4th Conference of cc of
RCB(b) with Responsible Workers ofthe
National Republics and Regions (June 1923); in; 'Works', Volume 5;Moscow; 1953; p. 316).

In 1989, on the eve of the liquidation of the Soviet Union, Sultan-Galiyev
remained one of very few early leading members of the Soviet Communist
Party not rehabilitated by the revisionists:

"Sultan-Galiyev,
the father of 'Muslim Communism', remained one of the only
two prominent early Bolshevik leaders still considered as 'non-persons'
in 1989".(Amir
Taheri: 'Crescent in a Red Sky: The Future of Islam in the Soviet
Union. London; 1989; p. 212).

International
Repercussions of Sultan-Galiyevism

Sultan-Galiyevism has attracted support from a number of bourgeois revolutionaries
and revisionists in countries outside the Soviet Union.

"Algeria's
President, Ahmed Ben Bella, in a recent interview . . .disclosed
that he was very much impressed by the theories of an earlyRussian Marxist named Sultan-Galiyev
who believed that the real struggle in
the world would commence when the underdeveloped nations rose upagainst the industrialised northern
tier".('Newsweek',
13 January 1964; p. 28).

Chinese revisionism contains theses closely similar to those of Sultan-Galiyevism.
Lin Piao* declares:

"If North
America and western Europe can be called 'the cities of the world', then
Asia, Africa and Latin America constitute 'the rural areas of the world'.
. . . The contemporary world revolution . . . presents a picture of the
encirclement of cities by the rural areas. In the final analysis, the whole
cause of world revolution hinges on the revolutionary struggles of the
Asian, African and Latin American peoples".(Lin Piao:
"Long Live the Victory of People s War!"; Peking; 1965; p.48-49).NOTES:The BASMACHI
were members of an anti-Soviet counter-revolutionary organisation in Central
Asia in 1917-26. It was supported by British and US interventionists and
by reactionary circles in Turkey, Afghanistan and China.

The BUND
(= the General Workers' Union of Lithuania, Poland and Russia) was formed
in 1897. It stood for the autonomous organisation of Jewish workers. It
took a social-chauvinist stand during World War I and during the Civil
War supported the counter-revolutionary forces. It dissolved itself in
1921.

PAN-ISLAMISM
is a movement for the union of all Muslims within a singlestate.PAN-TURANIAN:
supporting the union of all peoples speaking Turanian (Turkic) languages.PAN-TURKISM
is a movement for the union of all Turkic-speaking peoples a single state.